Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 19:27:01 +0100 From: Ulrich Spoerlein <q@galgenberg.net> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: ports@freebsd.org, "\[LoN\]Kamikaze" <LoN_Kamikaze@gmx.de> Subject: Re: portupgrade slow Message-ID: <20060210182701.GA1109@galgenberg.net> In-Reply-To: <20060207203725.61f12be9@Magellan.Leidinger.net> References: <43E711DB.40608@gmx.de> <20060207181150.GH1060@galgenberg.net> <20060207203725.61f12be9@Magellan.Leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Alexander Leidinger wrote: >While 15 to 30 minutes is really long, and I think Ulrich found your >problem, portupgrade is a memory hog nowadays... but we have 14k ports >which the pgktools keep in a DB in some way (as a graph), so is anyone >out there who speaks ruby and is willing to have a look if this can be >optimized? I think it's the dependancy checking. Compare the startup time of=20 portupgrade -na vs. portupgrade -Ona Ulrich Spoerlein --=20 PGP Key ID: 20FEE9DD Encrypted mail welcome! Fingerprint: AEC9 AF5E 01AC 4EE1 8F70 6CBD E76E 2227 20FE E9DD Which is worse: ignorance or apathy? Don't know. Don't care. --0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFD7Nr1524iJyD+6d0RAqzDAJ4oqcEMxVcKFKY46GF4IWxlHH/sWACfbspr fRM1W9tL3AlQQzjPtejFQ5g= =x5Er -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060210182701.GA1109>